Various physical exercise training program models and devices are known in the art. They may be divided into five groups:
1. Solutions that present a training program or schedule based on historically collected empirical data. These programs may be generic or specific and may cover a time period of a week to a year. For example, marathon training typically includes a 6-month training program with miles increasing each week and tapering towards the end.
2. Solutions that assess the magnitude of the training load such as speed, distance, elapsed time, amount of weight lifted, etc.
3. Solutions that monitor changes in heart rate and warn the user via an audio signal when his or her pulse moves above or below a predetermined heart rate zone.
4. Solutions that assess the functional state of a person and provide information of the individual's current physiological state and may also provide an indication of heart rate zones for various levels of training loads.
5. Solutions that are a combination of Solutions 3 and 4.
While beneficial in advancing the field, the prior art is disadvantageous in that it is not responsive to the individual needs or current physiological state of the specific person undergoing training. Generic programs may be inappropriate or not sufficiently accurate for a given individual. Furthermore, daily changes in the functional state of a person may make the dictates of a generic program inapplicable on a given day/period. If an athlete continues with the proscribed training regime when his/her functional state does not support it, then the athlete risks injury and/or a substantial setback in their training.
In addition, if an attempt is made to more closely analyze the training program and/or physiological assess the person using currently available technology, several disadvantages arise. These include, but are not limited to, a significant amount of time is/may be required, multiple assessments are needed, and exercise is interrupted during assessment, among other disadvantages.
Thus, a need exists to expediently and/or contemporaneously capture the data indicative of the functional state of a subject under test (SUT), to assess this data to determine current functional state, and to adjust a training program in response thereto to improve the training process and therefore deliver better physical performance to the user. A need further exists to achieve the above in a manner that is convenient, lightweight, easy-to-use and effective.
Prior art systems are further disadvantageous in that they do not assess the work performed nor adjust the training program as needed based on the workload assessment.